Everyone "Cherry Picks" and that's OK

"Cherry picking" is what sane people do when they read things.

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

Most people who've read the Bible have favorite passages. I still have mine even though I don't believe in that kind of god anymore. It's only natural that a person should, say, feel much more inspired by the Sermon on the Mount than the story of Lot and his daughters.

Thankfully, most Christians in my locality accept that the laws of the OT were only for ancient Jewish culture. [Well, except for the tithing and homosexuality; they hate to throw out stuff they like]. That's a rather large example of cherry picking that I'm glad they do.

If anything, there should be even more Cherry Picking. If people would just admit that it is a necessary, even inevitable perhaps, step, we wouldn't have any Young-Earth Creationists, for example.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
If anything, there should be even more Cherry Picking. If people would just admit that it is a necessary, even inevitable perhaps, step, we wouldn't have any Young-Earth Creationists, for example.

But when you take a large body of work and cherry pick it, then you cannot claim to be 'following' the body of work. If you pick stuff that 'resonates' with you, then you are basically just agreeing with what you already believe. A surprising number of people do this but don't realise it is what they are doing and attribute to the Bible some magical powers because it 'resonates' with them.

Young-Earth Creationists do have a point. If you can't trust all of it, then why should you trust any of it.?

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

It is good to explore what the Bible says about itself. The Bible has much to say about what to emphasize and what to pay close attention to.

If you live in Boston and get a map from AAA how to drive to New York, the main thing is the instructions how to get to the destination. Sure, there are plenty of other things on the pages showing the route from Boston to New York. But the big picture, the main picture is the route from Boston to the destination of New York.

The destination of the 66 books of the Bible are the last two chapters of Revelation 21 and 22. Everything else in the book has its main focus of bringing humanity and the universe from its creation TO that final destination in eternity.

Keeping in mind that this New Jerusalem and its "new heaven and a new earth" is the final goal, helps from getting too off on "cherry picked" tangents. You should frequently remind your self as you read through the Bible - " God is doing everything to arrive at this final goal in the end of Revelation. It is all FOR this final goal."

Originally posted by sonship

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

It is good to explore what the Bible says about itself. The Bible has much to say ab ...[text shortened]... ng to arrive at this final goal in the end of [b]Revelation. It is all FOR this final goal."[/b]

Sound reasoning sonship. Good post. The Bible as a map is a great analogy.

Using that analogy I might amend, for the sake of the discussion, the "final destination" goes beyond the new creation to a place called "the ages to come" out in eternity. Perhaps it's the same thing.

Also, "the big picture", and main focal point of the Bible, is the person of Jesus Christ. He is the main theme of the Bible from beginning to end. The one called the Alpha and Omega. 🙂

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
"Cherry picking" is what sane people do when they read things.

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

Most people who've read the ...[text shortened]... sary, even inevitable perhaps, step, we wouldn't have any Young-Earth Creationists, for example.

Only accepting the parts I like makes me more important than the text itself. Rejecting it
because of the parts I dislike, makes me more important than the text itself. Rejecting just
the parts I dislike also makes me more important than the text itself.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
"Cherry picking" is what sane people do when they read things.

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

Most people who've read the ...[text shortened]... sary, even inevitable perhaps, step, we wouldn't have any Young-Earth Creationists, for example.

I don't know Big Dogg. Are any of us truly sane?

I think cherry picking is an attempt at finding sanity, or keeping it. Whatever that means.

Cherry picking a document like the Bible is a mistake. Cherry picking is the readers attempt to infuse an interpretation that coincides with their own personal view of reality. The Bible doesn't exist to support our idea of what is or should be. The Bible exists to inform us. It isn't open to anyone's personal interpretation.

The Bible "cherry picks" us. The Bible takes us apart and puts us back together again the way we should be.

Originally posted by josephw
I don't know Big Dogg. Are any of us truly sane?

I think cherry picking is an attempt at finding sanity, or keeping it. Whatever that means.

Cherry picking a document like the Bible is a mistake. Cherry picking is the readers attempt to infuse an interpretation that coincides with their own personal view of reality. The Bible doesn't exist to support ...[text shortened]... cherry picks" us. The Bible takes us apart and puts us back together again the way we should be.

Are you never guilty of cherry picking?

As for homosexuality, try reading Romans 1-2.

It is defined as a sin in the New Testament too.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Are you never guilty of cherry picking?

Sure I am. Who isn't?

Point is to not do it. As I said, cherry picking is akin to inserting one's own interpretation into the text without taking into consideration the whole context.

A text without a context is a pretext.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But when you take a large body of work and cherry pick it, then you cannot claim to be 'following' the body of work. If you pick stuff that 'resonates' with you, then you are basically just agreeing with what you already believe. A surprising number of people do this but don't realise it is what they are doing and attribute to the Bible some magical power ...[text shortened]... reationists do have a point. If you can't trust all of it, then why should you trust any of it.?

The "large body of work" in question contains much more than strictures or commandments. There are parables, legends, geneologies, historical accounts, etc. One does not really "follow" things like that. [At best, they can claim that "all the history and legends happened exactly as stated". "Follow" is a poor choice of word to describe that kind of support.]

"Resonating" is not necessarily a simple "agreeing with what you already believe". Sometimes you read something on a topic you had not considered very much. Other times it's a different way of thinking about a known topic. There can be a spark of interest that becomes resonance upon further consideration. [Essentially, a 'learning' process.]

I'm surprised to see a logical person such as yourself repeating a statement like, "if you can't trust all of it, then why should you trust any of it?" Rather than responding to that statement, I think I'll give you the opportunity to retract it. If you decline, THEN I'll respond to it. 🙂

Originally posted by sonship

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

It is good to explore what the Bible says about itself. The Bible has much to say ab ...[text shortened]... ng to arrive at this final goal in the end of [b]Revelation. It is all FOR this final goal."[/b]

OK, so here we have an example. Revelation 21 and 22 is the cherry.

Maybe I should throw this out there. When I think of "cherry picking" I don't envision treating all the "unpicked" sections as utter rubbish. Just not as "special" or "important".

Originally posted by KellyJay
Only accepting the parts I like makes me more important than the text itself. Rejecting it
because of the parts I dislike, makes me more important than the text itself. Rejecting just
the parts I dislike also makes me more important than the text itself.

That's not true.

All it means is that you are a thinking person and the text must win you over and convince you. It says nothing about who/what is more important.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
"Cherry picking" is what sane people do when they read things.

"Cherry picking" when it comes to the Bible is to be expected. It can hardly be avoided. The Bible is a large collection of books written about a large variety of topics. It's only natural that some of them will resonate more than others with each reader.

Most people who've read the ...[text shortened]... sary, even inevitable perhaps, step, we wouldn't have any Young-Earth Creationists, for example.

Apparently you will only serve a God that you understand 100% and always agree with 100%.

That's why the god you serve is you.

Honestly, if you can't read the story and teachings of Christ and embrace them, then God has no place in your life.

Originally posted by josephw
I don't know Big Dogg. Are any of us truly sane?

I think cherry picking is an attempt at finding sanity, or keeping it. Whatever that means.

Cherry picking a document like the Bible is a mistake. Cherry picking is the readers attempt to infuse an interpretation that coincides with their own personal view of reality. The Bible doesn't exist to support ...[text shortened]... cherry picks" us. The Bible takes us apart and puts us back together again the way we should be.

Well, no. No one is truly sane. There are just varying degrees of insanity.

Critical thinking is the best means of fighting the insane parts of ourselves. We are full of emotions and prejudices and biases and our ego shields us from truth if it would prove us misguided or wrong.

I suppose there are different motivations for "cherry picking". Doing so just to reinforce what you already believe, or really want to be true, is self-deluding and worthless. That is not what I am advocating.

I am advocating truth-seeking, which involves not only finding information that challenges, and occasionally defeats, your own preconceptions, but also down-playing, or ignoring, things that aren't so important, and also discarding things that are found wanting after critical examination.

Finally, I completely disagree that "[the Bible] isn't open to anyone's personal interpretation." I believe interpretation is inevitable. There is no such thing as an unbiased reader. We read through the clouded lenses of our own eyes. Our brain processes information against the background of our own experiences, personality, and the like.

Originally posted by whodey
Apparently you will only serve a God that you understand 100% and always agree with 100%.

That's why the god you serve is you.

Honestly, if you can't read the story and teachings of Christ and embrace them, then God has no place in your life.

Once again with the all-or-nothing mentality. I find it completely impractical.

Say there was a god who 99% of the time did the morally correct thing. I'd probably be OK with following such a god, given that the 1% didn't include anything too horrible, such as eternal torment or genocide. It would be silly of me to completely rebel against such a god, especially given that my track record on moral matters is a bit lower than 99%.

I can support SOME of the teachings of Christ. I'm not going to love those who hate me, nor refrain from the occasional lustful glance at a woman, nor sell all I have and give it to the poor. [I'll give some, don't get me wrong.] But I'm down with helping people in need, and being forgiving, kind and compassionate overall. Maybe YOU would throw all of it out if you couldn't practice all of it, but I'm not going to. 🙂